安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文（繁体中文）
日本語（日语）
한국어（韩语）
ไทย（泰语）
български（保加利亚语）
Čeština（捷克语）
Dansk（丹麦语）
Deutsch（德语）
English（英语）
Español-España（西班牙语 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希腊语）
Français（法语）
Italiano（意大利语）
Bahasa Indonesia（印度尼西亚语）
Magyar（匈牙利语）
Nederlands（荷兰语）
Norsk（挪威语）
Polski（波兰语）
Português（葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙）
Português-Brasil（葡萄牙语 - 巴西）
Română（罗马尼亚语）
Русский（俄语）
Suomi（芬兰语）
Svenska（瑞典语）
Türkçe（土耳其语）
Tiếng Việt（越南语）
Українська（乌克兰语）
报告翻译问题
讨论规则及指引
举报此帖
Player 1 "Wow, I played The Long Dark and hated it because uh, I couldn't keep myself fed and warm and the dang it, failing to meet my needs KILLED ME, that sucks, I'm never playing a survival game again!"
Player 2 "I got you bro, there's another kind of "survival game" that, strangely, is described exactly the same way, but don't worry bro, they just call it a survival game but it's impossible to NOT survive, haha funny right?! You get to own every epic thing and get big glory for achieving all the legendary stuff, it's all guaranteed! grind for glory brah, it's easy. Just buy Deep Rock Galactic, V-Rising, Valheim, or any of the other Action/RPGs that use the "survival" description because that genre is hot right now."
I wish these players could come up with a term that they like. They want to infinitely re-spawn and never face risk or consequence. What can they call a game that provides that?
Respawner?
Valheim-Like?
Everyone Wins?
No Setbacks?
This is nothing about difficulty. You can play a real survival game on easy settings and it's easy, but still a survival game where failing to meet needs results in death, not fainting.
To be survival, failure to meet needs must result in death. To be "fake survival" failing to meet needs results in fainting. So I guess games that include "survival elements" and do not allow anyone to click an option for permadeath (even if they want to), are Action/RPGs with survival elements and don't offer a permadeath option. Thats very wordy. So this is the problem, Action/RPGs are describing themselves in the same terms used by actual survival games and it's leading to bad reviews and refunds.
There should be a genre descriptor for "everyone wins" games so that if they stick "survival" into their description, survival genre fans will know it's not an actual survival game.
There's already a term for these games that have survival mode with no loading or respawn systems, their known as Hardcore, because they remove any function of easy or medium notes, some games may term them differently but collectively their known by their bulk name of Hardcore.
In Runescape, you have Ironman mode which if you die, you can either pay 5$ for the only revival chance you'll get and your 2nd death wipes the account, or Hardcore Ironman that effectively nukes the account entirely upon death. Warcraft has added it as well, your death will wipe the hero from existence.
And what your asking for also already exists, its known as Hardcore Survival games and some games have them as is but others don't.
Its not an issue of US not knowing what it is, its the issue of you not knowing they are called Hardcore games, they exist, I play a few already, thats the difference. What defines a survival game is the requirement of food, water and sleep, that is low tier, but add heat or shelter is just survival-crafting games in the nutshell. Death leading to a wipe of your game is known as Hardcore Survival which, yes, some games do that.
No, Green Hell, The Long Dark, etc are simply described as survival games. Yes, they have settings which allow hard core modes. But a survival game on easy settings is easy while still requiring needs be met to avoid death. That's what survival means.
In contrast, there are Action/RPGs that toss in some food, water, etc elements, but these are just buffs, not requirements. I can play Valheim, V-Rising, etc and NEVER eat and yet NEVER DIE. They don't have any settings which result in death for not meeting needs. So they are using the "survival game" tag as a way to generate more sales. They are actually Action/RPGs with food, blood, or whatever decorated to look like "survival" when they are simply buffs. When Mario eats a mushroom, that's a buff, not survival.
I'm not selling the idea that players should play like I do. Great survival games like The Long Dark, Green Hell, Subnautica, etc. offer a full range of play from casual to hardcore. And they accurately describe themselves as survival because they offer game modes where meeting needs is what allows you to survive.
Survival game are a struggle to survive the elements.
Action/RPGs are a struggle to survive enemies. If they let you eat a hot dog or drink someone's blood to buff your abilities that doesn't make them a survival game.
Time your faint for maximum effectr, , customize your swoon animations, stack and cancel swoons for combos but be sure you land on something or someone soft.
I like these hyperbolic scenarios you are using to justify this weird grudge against these games.
I suggest 'Soulsvival' for example.
Only with people who aren't actual customers.
crisis events would incluce
Free game forum posting
nobody is real posting
Mega corp canceled another .OS
Holiday Event Promotions
New Game release that Corpo wants a discount on where player profits suffer.
players would have to pay out of profit for forum posting shills to counter forum threads
Yeah, words lose their meaning when misused. I just left a horrible review for V-Rising based on the game company's description of the game as a survival game. Here is what they called it:
ABOUT THIS GAME
A Vampire Survival Experience
Awaken as a weakened vampire after centuries of slumber. Hunt for blood to regain your strength while hiding from the scorching sun to survive.
And yet, I basked in the sun again and again. I refused to drink blood. Yet these tests only resulted in fainting. I quickly discovered there is no way to NOT survive. Therefore, it's not a survival game. The challenge in survival games, is obviously the struggle to survive. In V-Rising, you can completely ignore all needs forever and you will never perish. V-Rising is actually an Action/RPG Diablo clone with crafting and basebuilding and combat buffs that take the form of drinking various kinds of blood. Buffs do not equal survival. If you make a game where eating mushooms makes you powerful (Like Mario Bros), it's not survival because of the word "eat", the mushrooms are buffs, that's it.
If everyone survives no matter what, it's not a survival game.
So, yeah, the game company either 1. wants to cash in on the survival game craze despite not having a survival game. or 2. they intend to offer options later that will let players opt in to settings where drinking blood and avoiding sun is actually mandatory. Because you're a vampire duh?
Until they rectify this, their reputation and bottom line suffers. But the're new, and they'll learn. The companies that do best describe their products accurately so as not to mislead consumers. Because backlash.
Isn't your problem solved by sticking to games tagged with "permadeath"?